Abī Ḥātim profiled him (3/1/3) through the reports of both Abū ʿĀṣim al-Nabīl and Aḥmad ibn Ziyād ibn Sayyār al-Sayyārī, from him, but mentioned neither criticism nor accreditation of him. He meets Ibn Ḥibbān’s criteria, so perhaps he is included in his al-Thiqāt. The book was then printed, and he is indeed found therein (7/158), through the report of al-Tabūdhakī, Mūsā ibn Ismāʿīl. Thus, three trustworthy men narrated from him: this one, al-Nabīl, and Hudbah.
The second: through Qatādah, from him. It was also narrated by al-Bazzār and Abū Bakr al-Muʿaddil, in Twelve Sessions from the Dictations (2/1), through Fahd ibn Ḥayyān, who said: Hammām narrated to us from him.
I say: Its narrators are trustworthy, apart from Fahd ibn Ḥayyān, who is weak.
The third: through Abū Sufyān, from him, with similar wording. Al-Bazzār also narrated it through Abū Bakr ibn ʿAyyāsh, from al-Aʿmash, from him. This is a good chain; its narrators are trustworthy narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ.
The fourth: through Ḥumayd, from him, with the same wording. Ibn ʿAdī (148/1) and al-Aṣbahānī, in al-Targhīb (10/2), narrated it through Abū Yaḥyā al-Waqqār, who said: Muʾammal ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān narrated to us from him. He said: “Abū Yaḥyā al-Waqqār, Zakariyyā ibn Yaḥyā, fabricates hadith. Muʾammal, too, has weakness, and perhaps he is also responsible for the defect.”
I say: This route cannot be used as corroborating evidence because of its severe weakness; the preceding routes suffice.
- As for the hadith of Abū Hurayrah, Muḥammad ibn Dīnār narrates it from Dāwūd ibn Abī Hind, from al-Shaʿbī, from him, attributed to the Prophet. Al-Ḍiyāʾ narrated it in al-Aḥādīth wa-l-Ḥikāyāt (12/206/1–2). This Muḥammad ibn Dīnār is al-Ṭāḥī: truthful, but poor in retention.